Share
816 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 67
clock Created with Sketch.
17/09/18
13:04
Share
Originally posted by bensk
↑
Have a look at the case of Donald North versus Legend Mining in 2014. The outcome was that Legend ended up paying a $10,000 fine NOT forfeiting the tenements. Whilst the circumstances were different the decision still hinged on section 98 of the WA Mining Act and whether the lack of expenditure was of "sufficient gravity" to warrant forfeiture.
In the end the presiding judge made two important points:
1) The companies had spent some money (not all) but some---KDR has spent millions!!
2) If forfeiture had been enforced it would be totally disproportionate to the perceived offence committed (i.e. lack of expenditure). As the tenement for Legend made up over 30% of their company value a decision of forfeiture was not entertained.
I am no legal expert however Australian law is based on precedent and Kidman and SQM have spent a fortune so far on this project. This combined with the above decision should see the minister decide to perhaps just give a penalty and not even refer it further to the warden or ultimately the courts.
Solid buy down at $1.05. Good luck everyone. Rational behaviour is rewarded during these times.
Expand
Hi @bensk thanks for this. Have you got a link to the case? It seems like a very relevant precedent for the current KDR case. I am very confident that KDR will not have to forfeit the tenements, its just how long this will take to resolve which is my biggest concern.